(09-08-2012 01:47 PM)Observer Wrote: They seem to be lacking realistic concept on what "writing" was all about in those days.

You can't draw parallels to 2012 where some people even know 4 languages.

People where ILLITERATE back then
Language was not a standard
It is EXTREMELY unlikely that anyone whose writing mattered even encountered the person(s) they called Jesus.

Agreed, Jesus has no existence outside third party hearsay......

You got to give Paul some credit though (Paul was the guy behind the first Jesus writing, right?).

He invented the worlds most popular fiction character.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.

I wonder what the odds are that 4 different Gospel writers, Paul, Apostolic Fathers, Josephus, Tacitus, and other writers in the NT from the 1st century all imagined the exact same guy by the name of Jesus who was crucified by Pontius Pilate?

Since I find that none of these writers refer to each other's writings (aside from the Synoptic and Apostolic Fathers) I think we could use a logical and reasonable explanation supported by textual evidence that could provide a better argument for Jesus being a total myth than for existence.

Nobody can say with certainty whether or not Jesus existed or was a total myth, but the argument for existence is certainly far better than the argument for total myth.

Honestly guys, the mythology argument needs to adequately dispute existence, and so far, I have not seen one good argument to dispute it. I see plenty of assertion, supposition, and tons of logical fallacies and lack of reasoning, but not once in 30 years have I seen a good solid argument for total mythology on this subject.

My position remains as it is:

Somebody named Jesus who was regarded as the Christ by many Jews was crucified by Pontius Pilate sometime in the 1st half of the 1st century.

Whoever he was is an entirely different argument.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.